| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Closes #267.
|
|
Closes #263. Note, this only affects inline comments.
With block comments we parse differently, and don't guarantee
that only valid HTML5 comments will pass. This all needs to
be made more explicit in the spec.
However, this fix addresses the cpu problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partially addresses #252.
Still need to:
- update C parser.
- put an example in the spec.
|
|
Partially addresses #252.
This fixes the infinite loop, and brings the JS parser into
agreement with cmark, but both still have bad output in this
case, so more work is needed.
|
|
This improves parsing of emphasis around punctuation.
Background:
http://talk.commonmark.org/t/emphasis-inside-strong-broken-in-js-implementation-when-parenthesis-involved/903/6
The basic idea of the change is that if the delimiter is part of
a delimiter clump that has punctuation to the left and a normal
character (non-space, non-punctuation) to the right, it can only
be an opener. If it has punctuation to the right and a normal
character (non-space, non-punctuation) to the left, it can only be a closer.
This handles cases like
**Gomphocarpus (*Gomphocarpus physocarpus*, syn. *Asclepias
physocarpa*)**
and
**foo "*bar*" foo**
better than before.
The spec section on Emphasis and Strong Emphasis has been extensively
revised. The C and JS implementations have been brought up to date,
and all tests pass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In JS, use 'Text' instead of 'Str'.
In spec, use "plain textual content" instead of "strings."
|
|
They were gobbling whitespace after shortcut reference links,
e.g.
[foo] bar
[foo]: url
Closes #214.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previously there was a rule that nothing in a string of more than 3
`*` or `_` characters could close or start emphasis. This was artifical
and led to strange asymmetries, e.g. you could have
`*a *b**` emph within emph but not `**a **b****` strong within strong.
The new parsing strategy makes it easy to remove this limitation.
Spec, js, and c implementations have been updated. Spec might need
some further grooming.
|
|
It is no longer needed with the new stack-based emphasis parsing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
